Hate to say it but I think Obama will be re-elected

[dav4463]

I just don't see the Republicans doing anything that can beat Obama. The media still loves the guy. Average voters do not read news. They just think Obama is cool so they vote for him. Issues do not matter to them. They still blame any problems on Bush. I just see no hope of beating him. :(

[PaceAdvantage]

I disagree with you on many fronts.

I disagree with your implication that it is some sort of surprise to this board that Obama's chances of reelection are good. People have been posting this for years now...even the right-leaners.

I also disagree that people think "Obama is cool" and will just vote for him. Obama has lost most of his "coolness" over the past 3+ years...even the liberals in the media have started to turn against him and see him for what he is.

Bush is far removed from the picture, and if Obama even attempts to invoke his name during this campaign, it will only make him look bad...Americans hate a whiner, or someone who likes to blame others for his own lack of success.

It really often comes down to "the economy, stupid." If the economy is still stagnant, or barely growing, and jobs are still hard to come by, then Obama is NOT going to have an easy time of it.

For the most part, Americans aren't idiots. They can be fooled once, like they were in November 2008. But it's awfully difficult to fool them a second time, unless there is no viable opposition.

Romney is viable opposition. And Obama really hasn't done anything...except kill bin Laden. Do you think that's enough? I don't...

The unemployment rate hasn't really moved much since he's been in office. Gas prices are slowly and steadily creeping ever upwards (can't blame that on Bush anymore...but funny how nobody is blaming it on Obama)...spending is still out of control...the real estate market is still in shambles...

Are you better off than you were four years ago? I don't think a majority of people will answer that question positively...

I put Obama's chances currently at the low end of 50/50 (is that a Yogi-ism? lol)

[PaceAdvantage]

The stock market is at the same level it was back in June 2008...right before the big financial crash....so nothing has really changed there either.

You can say Obama was responsible for the markets being able to battle back and recover all those losses...but honestly...the S&P went down to almost 600 three months into Obama's term...so it really had nowhere else to go but up...UNLESS the world was about to end...and most of us know that's not going to happen anytime soon.

Looking at my daily chart of the S&P, I will say that things are looking very good that the markets continue in their uptrend, so perhaps better times are on the way between now and November, and if that's the case, then Obama might easily win. But at the same time, the markets are heading into serious areas of overhead resistance, so this is really a crucial area for the markets as a whole.

Tomorrow's January jobs number might just be the thing to tip the market hard in one direction. If I were a betting man, I'll bet the jobs number is going to be better than expected and that we rally...the consensus is for 135,000 jobs added in January...that seems like a rather timid number that can easily be beaten...since I am a betting man, I say that number gets beaten to the upside.

[Greyfox]

Obama cannot run on his record.
He's managed to take the country into the deepest debt ever.
Unemployment is high and projections are that it will remain high.
Tonight he is even justifying his proposed tax hikes on the rich with Jesus.
That is an appeal to evangelics that Romney can't quite equal.
Obama will play the Jesus card again.
Obama will also attempt to portray himself as Robin Hood.
The Republicans should take away his Robin Hood bow and arrow by allowing him to tax the rich. That will only net the Govt. $35 Billion bucks and would hardly offset the trillions that he's ran up.
Clearly Obama is in over his head.
If the Republicans can't win this next election, they will have only themselves to blame. God Bless America if this incompetent gets in again, but incumbents are usually hard to beat.

[newtothegame]

Obama cannot run on his record.
He's managed to take the country into the deepest debt ever.
Unemployment is high and projections are that it will remain high.
Tonight he is even justifying his proposed tax hikes on the rich with Jesus.
That is an appeal to evangelics that Romney can't quite equal.
Obama will play the Jesus card again.
Obama will also attempt to portray himself as Robin Hood.
The Republicans should take away his Robin Hood bow and arrow by allowing him to tax the rich. That will only net the Govt. $35 Billion bucks and would hardly offset the trillions that he's ran up.
Clearly Obama is in over his head.
If the Republicans can't win this next election, they will have only themselves to blame. God Bless America if this incompetent gets in again, but incumbents are usually hard to beat.
Yeah, Grey, I think you are right. Especially in the fact about incumbents losing. I believe I heard today that only TWICE have repugs won over an incumbent (one of them being Reagan).
Given that Obama will be hard to beat, I am hoping to gain a few seats in the senate and strongly hold onto the house. If he wins, let him cry for another four years how the repugs arent letting him do anything!! :lol:

[fast4522]

Fear not the angry white man will rise again, no disrespect for primates.

[Marshall Bennett]

I just don't see the Republicans doing anything that can beat Obama. The media still loves the guy. Average voters do not read news. They just think Obama is cool so they vote for him. Issues do not matter to them. They still blame any problems on Bush. I just see no hope of beating him. :(
Your reasoning is quite broad and simple, but at the end of the day and as much as other conservatives here hate to admit it, you're right. PA makes a few valid points, but they're weak and won't hold up. The economy will be in good enough shape for the MSM to use it to Obama's advantage. Of course in all reality our economy is in shambles, but the average voter won't see it from a long term perspective. His base does indeed find him as "cool". It's one of the main factors that got him elected in 08. Everything from his walk to his talk, he is a cool character. His voting base does indeed still blame Bush. Intelligent democratic voters may not blame Bush, but there ya go, it was the large mass of unintelligent voters that Obama was able to recruit in 08 that other candidates couldn't.
Short of a complete campaign meltdown (won't happen) or having some sort of personel disaster derail him, he'll be re-elected. It's truly ashame because in all reality, the economy is not good in this country and will likely get much worse in the next 4 year. His reckless spending will eventually spawn inflation like we've never seen before. Unfortunately your average voter isn't concerned with the future, they're really not.

[Tom]

Obama cannot run on his record.

And he can't run on it, either.
2012 will have TWO Black History months....February, and November! :D

[elysiantraveller]

It really often comes down to "the economy, stupid." If the economy is still stagnant, or barely growing, and jobs are still hard to come by, then Obama is NOT going to have an easy time of it.

Thats all it comes down to.

If it improves he wins. If it doesn't then he is out.

Most elections are decided by the economy... unless there is a war going on.

[PaceAdvantage]

Tomorrow's January jobs number might just be the thing to tip the market hard in one direction. If I were a betting man, I'll bet the jobs number is going to be better than expected and that we rally...the consensus is for 135,000 jobs added in January...that seems like a rather timid number that can easily be beaten...since I am a betting man, I say that number gets beaten to the upside.And boy did we ever beat that number....

+243,000

It's an easy game... :lol:

[jdhanover]

The election will be close - the country is split 50/50 for the most part.

The Republican argument against Obama has been stated here but it has problems - the Democrats can say the economy was dumped in the crapper off of 8 years of Republican leadership. IF you believe that Presidents' policies have a big impact (I think they have much LESS of an impact than people say) then that plus 2009 results* are on the Republican scorecard. Since 2009 the economy has gotten better (albet it is not good). Dems will take credit for it.

The Democrats problem is that they don't have specific things they can really point to that ties the rebound (yes, it is a rebound even though it is not a boom). And everything they discuss sounds like a hand-out or bail-out and/or anti-business.

* 2009 is an intersting issue - the budget was set in 2008 so all the arguments that Obama has ballooned the deficit gets a lot murkier when you realize that 2009 $$$ were set prior to his taking office.

My prediction is Obama squeaks out re-election

[boxcar]

For the most part, Americans aren't idiots.

Then tell me, please, how so many "smart" Americans could have voted for Obama in the last election. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

[Tom]

Obama has already proved a majority of them are indeed idiots.

[boxcar]

My prediction is Obama squeaks out re-election

And history would most certainly be solidly in your corner. The Republicans positively stink at unseating an incumbent opposition president.

Boxcar

[GameTheory]

Thats all it comes down to.

If it improves he wins. If it doesn't then he is out.

Most elections are decided by the economy... unless there is a war going on.Yes yes yes. Elections aren't decided on the issues or the media or whatever. If people feel like their own jobs and lives are going well, or at they feel some security going forward, Obama wins. If they are in despair and their own future looks like it is going in the wrong direction or they aren't sure where it is going, Obama loses. I don't think who the Republican candidate is even matters much to the equation.

[Marshall Bennett]

Yes yes yes. Elections aren't decided on the issues or the media or whatever. If people feel like their own jobs and lives are going well, or at they feel some security going forward, Obama wins. If they are in despair and their own future looks like it is going in the wrong direction or they aren't sure where it is going, Obama loses. I don't think who the Republican candidate is even matters much to the equation.
I don't agree with much of what you've said here. I don't think people will be in any better shape with their jobs or secured about their future in November than they are now. Certainly less so than 4 years ago. The media uses numbers to support it's attack on candidates, not feelings. Too often the numbers don't reflect what's really hurting people's lives, such as with emplyment statistics.
The Republican candidate means everything in the equation. This is probably the number one reason Obama will win, his competition is so weak. Neither Republican candidates are the caliber of Reagan or Clinton, the last two in recent history to beat an incumbent.

[Greyfox]

Yes yes yes. Elections aren't decided on the issues or the media or whatever. If people feel like their own jobs and lives are going well, or at they feel some security going forward, Obama wins. If they are in despair and their own future looks like it is going in the wrong direction or they aren't sure where it is going, Obama loses. I don't think who the Republican candidate is even matters much to the equation.

Housing foreclosures are predicted to peak in 2011.
One in 45 homes in 2010 received foreclosure notices.
That is a record high of 2.9 million homes.
Surely, one of the most important purchases for a family is a home.
That so many people are being routed out of their homes, tells me that there is a lot of despair.
Whether or not any of these displaced individuals follow politics, surely they have to seriously question Obama's policies.
Also, for those not being ousted, and are able to hang on to their properties, values have dropped so drastically that the individual net worth of many has sunk to new lows.
President Obama leads from the rear, if at all.
Obviously he is a failure in every area he touches including his passion for Solyndra and his blindness to the value of the Keystone Pipeline.
That he even has a snowball's chance in Hell of remaining in power goes over my head. But odds makers say he does. Un - feckin- believable, but true.

[boxcar]

Yes yes yes. Elections aren't decided on the issues or the media or whatever. If people feel like their own jobs and lives are going well, or at they feel some security going forward, Obama wins. If they are in despair and their own future looks like it is going in the wrong direction or they aren't sure where it is going, Obama loses. I don't think who the Republican candidate is even matters much to the equation.


Ahhh.....you've nailed it perfectly in terms of attitudes. So, let's take that to its logical conclusion.

If people are voting just to merely survive and their motives are purely "selfish", i.e. my job, my home, my money, my taxes, my, my, my....chances are very good that they will be absorbed with escaping from the "prison of their own despair" that they will take the first escape route they see, thinking it's the only one available to them. Therefore, they will be most prone to making an even worse decision come this election than the one they made in the last. This is so because they won't be taking the time to look at the big picture, only the small one -- mostly at themselves and their own circumstances.

Mental Myopia Kills!

Boxcar

[GameTheory]

I don't agree with much of what you've said here. I don't think people will be in any better shape with their jobs or secured about their future in November than they are now. Certainly less so than 4 years ago. I didn't say people are better off and I didn't say they are worse off, so I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with. I said if they feel good about how things are going, Obama wins, and if not he loses.

The media uses numbers to support it's attack on candidates, not feelings. Too often the numbers don't reflect what's really hurting people's lives, such as with emplyment statistics.And I think what goes on in actual people's lives trumps anything the media has to say.

The Republican candidate means everything in the equation. This is probably the number one reason Obama will win, his competition is so weak. Neither Republican candidates are the caliber of Reagan or Clinton, the last two in recent history to beat an incumbent.Well, if it is extremely close, then everything matters, at least in those states that end up being the deciders. But the fact is you could have predicted the last 100 years of elections by the state of the economy and how people felt about their own jobs and security without regard to who the candidates were. This has been true in war & peace, and every other time. I don't expect any different this time around. Things are good, incumbent party wins. Things not so good, they lose. (There is some relativity here.) I'm talking President only here -- balance of congress is a different story...

[mountainman]

My impression is that america's unemployment rate is (far) above the stats we're issued. Soooo many people I know or encounter are jobless. Borderlne lazy or tragically disenfranchised, these folks get govn assistance. The question thus becomes: Do they vote to secure employment, or to keep the welfare and foodstamps flowing? My guess is the latter, and obama wins.

[GameTheory]

My impression is that america's unemployment rate is (far) above the stats we're issued. Soooo many people I know or encounter are jobless. Borderlne lazy or tragically disenfranchised, these folks get govn assistance. The question thus becomes: Do they vote to secure employment, or to keep the welfare and foodstamps flowing? My guess is the latter, and obama wins.Those people don't vote at all.

[Greyfox]

Those people don't vote at all.

You don't think that Obama's Team will bus them in??

[mountainman]

Those people don't vote at all.

We'll see. Won't we?

[Caper1144]

Obama wins no problem. Wins the absolute ease. Sure Drudgereport will put up some shock poll in october where the Rebuplican takes the lead. But that will mean nothing.

It's definately the worst crop of Republicans I have ever seen. The absolute worst.

No fear though. The wait will be worth it. Chris Christie will in in 2016. A very very smart man who should be a great president. If not a fat one.

[boxcar]

We'll see. Won't we?

Yup, we will. As long as Obama keeps playing the Class Warfare card and keeps hammering home the lie that he's the champion of the Little Guy and that he's going to get the Filthy Rich and make them pay because it's all their fault (what else is new? :rolleyes: ), then many ears will be tickled by that message. In fact, I would not surprised at all if that message also resonated with the dead come election time -- enough so that they not only turn over in their graves but rise therefrom to vote. :D

Boxcar

[lamboguy]

We'll see. Won't we?that election not going to happen for 10 months.

we need peter berry's super bowl pick to get by this weekend!

that man is great at this

[bigmack]

Any idiot can tell you the states BO will carry and the states Romney will carry. The much talked about 'Battleground States' are where you'll find the answer.

Many of you should abandon forming opionions without any basis in fact. Go look at the numbers in those key states and you'll see --

Love to say it, Obama loses re-election.
ATTN Mods: please change the title of the thread.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/thc0231b2c.gif

[mountainman]

I don't think people will be in any better shape with their jobs or secured about their future in November than they are now. Certainly less so than 4 years ago.

This isn't the Reagan era, and his classic ( "Are you better off....etc etc") question just doesn't apply. The pessimism and sense of despair I see out there so permeate the populace that folks have no faith whatsoever that EITHER party can create jobs for them. Thus the question for many sadly becomes: Are you better off unemployed with food stamps, or with no food stamps? I think that's a harsh reality that greatly favors the prez. How ironic that the promise of change got him elected, but apprehension about further change may keep him in office.

[Marshall Bennett]

It's definately the worst crop of Republicans I have ever seen. The absolute worst..
Same holds true with both sides. Would be a joke what the Democrats would bring to the ring if a Republican were in office.

[bigmack]

Thus the question for many sadly becomes: Are you better off unemployed with food stamps, or with no food stamps? I think that's a harsh reality that greatly favors the prez. How ironic that the promise of change got him elected, but apprehension about further change may keep him in office.
I wouldn't go too overboard about people getting comfortable with handouts and them reasoning Romney will take them away.

It's a lock, WV goes Romney.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/WestVirginiaPresidentialElectionVotingHistory.png

[mountainman]

I wouldn't go too overboard about people getting comfortable with handouts and them reasoning Romney will take them away.


http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/WestVirginiaPresidentialElectionVotingHistory.png

Obviously, we disagree. Love the graphics, btw.. So bold, so informative.

[bigmack]

Obviously, we disagree. Love the graphics, btw.. So bold, so informative.
Sorry about that. Hadn't realized it was over your head.

Why don't you 'inform us' how you reach a conclusion based on hillbilly's in WV on food stamps and the FACT that WV went with McCain in an election year overwhelmed with Obama excitement.

You think WV will go D in this election? I laugh.

[riskman]

Starting in January 2011 more than 10,000 baby boomers a day will turn 65.This will continue for approximately another next 20 years.
Some will retire because they are jobless and looking for work in this economy at this age is difficult at best. The balance being forced out with decimated 401K's, IRA'S or other retirement plans also depended on their homes to supplement retirement find their homes valued much lower and worst ,some owe more on their home than it is worth.Medical,health care, fuel, property taxes, utilities, food, name it, the costs are rising.When the SHTF with these boomers there will be an explosion. Yes, it is only part of the population but their voices and actions will shake America. When the boomers children and grandchildren see their parents struggling and the the current system isn't working the stark reality of pessimism will set in and hang over this whole country.
This is starting now, I see it every day and the pols can ignore it at their own risk. If another crisis worse than 2008 happens to occur, clear the decks, major change will follow.

[mountainman]

Sorry about that. Hadn't realized it was over your head.

Why don't you 'inform us' how you reach a conclusion based on hillbilly's in WV on food stamps and the FACT that WV went with McCain in an election year overwhelmed with Obama excitement.

You think WV will go D in this election? I laugh.

I never said wv would go dem-just that the election would go to the prez. And, for the record, I live smack dab on the pa border and probably spend more time there-and in ohio-than in wv. And I was joking abt the graphics, but not entirely. To be honest, I envy the comp skills required to conjure them up. While I don't do the forum slugfest thing (and consider it cowardly) I do love to wager. So put up or shut up, $500 says obama wins.

By the way, I do respect your opinion and enjoy some of your posts.

[boxcar]

This isn't the Reagan era, and his classic ( "Are you better off....etc etc") question just doesn't apply. The pessimism and sense of despair I see out there so permeate the populace that folks have no faith whatsoever that EITHER party can create jobs for them. Thus the question for many sadly becomes: Are you better off unemployed with food stamps, or with no food stamps? I think that's a harsh reality that greatly favors the prez. How ironic that the promise of change got him elected, but apprehension about further change may keep him in office.

I think you have a good grasp on the general mood out there. People are fed up with both parties. In fact, what's even worse is that people here, like in so many other countries around the world, are fed up with the democratic process! (There are posts on this forum that speak to this fact.)

So, to what is the election going to come down? It's: Who can talk the better game. Who is better at the con? Hands down it'll be Obama if Romney is his opponent. Plus Obama will have the media squarely in his corner. Americans will be told (again!) that we're coming out of this mess and that it would be very dangerous to switch horses in mid-stream when things are just starting to get so much better. :rolleyes: After all, it was the Republicans who got the country into this mess, so do we dare trust the Lovers of the Rich and the Haters of the Downtrodden to stay on the course the Democrats have worked so hard to set for the country, etc., etc.?

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Starting in January 2011 more than 10,000 baby boomers a day will turn 65.This will continue for approximately another next 20 years.
Some will retire because they are jobless and looking for work in this economy at this age is difficult at best. The balance being forced out with decimated 401K's, IRA'S or other retirement plans also depended on their homes to supplement retirement find their homes valued much lower and worst ,some owe more on their home than it is worth.Medical,health care, fuel, property taxes, utilities, food, name it, the costs are rising.When the SHTF with these boomers there will be an explosion. Yes, it is only part of the population but their voices and actions will shake America. When the boomers children and grandchildren see their parents struggling and the the current system isn't working the stark reality of pessimism will set in and hang over this whole country.
This is starting now, I see it every day and the pols can ignore it at their own risk. If another crisis worse than 2008 happens to occur, clear the decks, major change will follow.

"Change" nothing! Soros is predicting outright civil disorder right here in the U.S.A. that is to say, in the United Socialists of America.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2091190/George-Soros-predicts-U-S-riots-insists-Euro-saved-global-economy-collapse.html

Boxcar

[pandy]

I'm not a Romney fan but he does have an excellent track record in business and with the economy still doing poorly I think his experience and success as a businessman will win him the election.

The only votes that matter are the independents. The liberals will vote for Obama, the conservatives will vote for Romney, that's a wash, but the independents went with Obama last time and this time they'll go with Romney. I don't think it will be that close unless something miraculous happens to the economy this year, which is very unlikely.

Romney just has to stay on the issues and give detailed explanations of how he'll fix the economy, and try to avoid saying stupid generalized things that can be taken out of context like he said this week.

[boxcar]

I'm not a Romney fan but he does have an excellent track record in business and with the economy still doing poorly I think his experience and success as a businessman will win him the election.

The only votes that matter are the independents. The liberals will vote for Obama, the conservatives will vote for Romney, that's a wash, but the independents went with Obama last time and this time they'll go with Romney. I don't think it will be that close unless something miraculous happens to the economy this year, which is very unlikely.

Romney just has to stay on the issues and give detailed explanations of how he'll fix the economy, and try to avoid saying stupid generalized things that can be taken out of context like he said this week.

Romney, for the most part, is full of mindless platitudes. I can't recall hearing him say anything of substance, thus far.

Boxcar

[Robert Goren]

Romney, for the most part, is full of mindless platitudes. I can't recall hearing him say anything of substance, thus far.

BoxcarSomething else we agree on. I think that we are up to an even dozen now.:lol:

[pandy]

Romney, for the most part, is full of mindless platitudes. I can't recall hearing him say anything of substance, thus far.

Boxcar


I agree. But I still think he'll win. He should try to give examples of how he turned the Olympics from a losing proposition to a profitable enterprise, and how he'll do the same for the country. Maybe he's saving the good stuff for the campaign. They basically handed him the nomination, none of the other guys were electable so the whole primary process was a moot point.

[lamboguy]

what i find bazaar is today our country is moving towards more government controls, more micromanaging of the economy, the same as failed countries such as the soviet union and other anti-capitalistic country's. china had been that way until recently, until they started to allow their citizens to own things like stakes in company's, real estate, and gold. china encourages its citizens to own gold.

therefore because i honestly believe that china is in the right direction and we are heading down the wrong one, i am going to take my cue as to who gets elected by the gold price. the big demand for gold is coming from other countries outside of great britain and the united states, its coming from china. the foreign policy of ROMNEY towards china seems to be antagonistic. if it looks like he is going to get elected i would expect china to step up their gold purchases, whether they buy the stuff in the open or out the back door.

the consolidation of gold has lasted for 6 months already. the gold price today stands almost 10% below the highs, while silver is 30% off the highs. it certainly looks to me like big things are in the cards for these precious metals, big enough where you might get a new president in november.

[acorn54]

real estate is better than gold and this country has the best real estate in the world

[boxcar]

real estate is better than gold and this country has the best real estate in the world

I'm wondering how much of it China already owns.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

what i find bazaar is today our country is moving towards more government controls, more micromanaging of the economy, the same as failed countries such as the soviet union and other anti-capitalistic country's. china had been that way until recently, until they started to allow their citizens to own things like stakes in company's, real estate, and gold. china encourages its citizens to own gold.

therefore because i honestly believe that china is in the right direction and we are heading down the wrong one, i am going to take my cue as to who gets elected by the gold price. the big demand for gold is coming from other countries outside of great britain and the united states, its coming from china. the foreign policy of ROMNEY towards china seems to be antagonistic. if it looks like he is going to get elected i would expect china to step up their gold purchases, whether they buy the stuff in the open or out the back door.

the consolidation of gold has lasted for 6 months already. the gold price today stands almost 10% below the highs, while silver is 30% off the highs. it certainly looks to me like big things are in the cards for these precious metals, big enough where you might get a new president in november.

Wow! Madam Lamboguy, You're amazing. You have made crystal balls obsolete in this 21st Century by replacing them with shiny gold bullion bars that reflect the future back to you. :lol:

Boxcar

[lamboguy]

thank you boxman

[boxcar]

thank you boxman

You gotta have it in your heart to forgive me. I typed that out while sipping on my first brew of the day.

Boxcar

[Caper1144]

Starting in January 2011 more than 10,000 baby boomers a day will turn 65.This will continue for approximately another next 20 years.
Some will retire because they are jobless and looking for work in this economy at this age is difficult at best. The balance being forced out with decimated 401K's, IRA'S or other retirement plans also depended on their homes to supplement retirement find their homes valued much lower and worst ,some owe more on their home than it is worth.Medical,health care, fuel, property taxes, utilities, food, name it, the costs are rising.When the SHTF with these boomers there will be an explosion. Yes, it is only part of the population but their voices and actions will shake America. When the boomers children and grandchildren see their parents struggling and the the current system isn't working the stark reality of pessimism will set in and hang over this whole country.
This is starting now, I see it every day and the pols can ignore it at their own risk. If another crisis worse than 2008 happens to occur, clear the decks, major change will follow.


The only candidate willing to deal with that stark reality is Ron Paul. And he's a lunitic..

The truth is. The president doesn't really make that much of a difference. Well, it does a bit, when one wants to play policeman in the desert forever. But domestically, whoever wins will basically just dive to the center.

Someone is going to have to deal with the problem you stated. The only truth is it won't happen until it absolutely has to. The football will be punted until then.

[Tom]

What this country needs is a government that represents the people.
Novel idea.


Pure fantasy?

[boxcar]

What this country needs is a government that represents the people.
Novel idea.


Pure fantasy?

Actually, it is. Which segment of the people? Which economic class? Which color (serious question given the AG we have)? Which class of resident -- U.S. citizens, legal aliens, illegal aliens? And does government represent the law abiding citizens or the law breakers?

Boxcar

[jognlope]

So if the top 1% are making 240% of what they made 2 decades ago, and here is a huge deficit, please explain how they cannot pay a small increase in taxes.
So walmart exec, who makes about $25 to 30 million, cannot pay a little more in his PERSONAL INCOME TAX? Business decisions, like hiring new works, are not based on one personal income tax. I mean, there is a deficit.

And how come Republicans are on C-Span saying the payroll tax cut has to be "paid for." Why didn't they ask how we were going to pay for the 10 years of Bush tax cuts and by the way the Medicare prescription program Bush signed.

[Greyfox]

So if the top 1% are making 240% of what they made 2 decades ago, and here is a huge deficit, please explain how they cannot pay a small increase in taxes.
.

The Republicans have to address this issue to disarm Obama's Robin Hood act.
Otherwise, knocking him out of the White House will be more difficult.

[bigmack]

Trend doesn't bode well for BO

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/PartisanTrends-RasmussenReports.png

So if the top 1% are making 240% of what they made 2 decades ago
Where did you get that?

[acorn54]

obama will be re-elected if romney or whoever is nominated starts talking about abortion,foreign policy,and religion.
nowadays the voters attention is to saving their jobs if they have one, or creation of jobs if they are unemployed.

[bigmack]

obama will be re-elected if romney or whoever is nominated starts talking about abortion,foreign policy,and religion.
One of the interesting things about following politics is the amount of truly confused people out here with their nutty notions.

[PaceAdvantage]

obama will be re-elected if romney or whoever is nominated starts talking about abortion,foreign policy,and religion.Seriously man...abortion is so yesterday's news...nobody talks about it anymore...especially during a presidential campaign...

[boxcar]

One of the interesting things about following politics is the amount of truly confused people out here with their nutty notions.

Truer words were never spoken, MACK! :D

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Seriously man...abortion is so yesterday's news...nobody talks about it anymore...especially during a presidential campaign...

Yeah, I can't wait to move on to something really important -- maybe like government-sanctioned euthanasia. :rolleyes: In the meantime, we do have ObamaCare to look forward to with its non-existent "death panels".

Boxcar

[JustRalph]

So if the top 1% are making 240% of what they made 2 decades ago, and here is a huge deficit, please explain how they cannot pay a small increase in taxes.
So walmart exec, who makes about $25 to 30 million, cannot pay a little more in his PERSONAL INCOME TAX? Business decisions, like hiring new works, are not based on one personal income tax. I mean, there is a deficit.

And how come Republicans are on C-Span saying the payroll tax cut has to be "paid for." Why didn't they ask how we were going to pay for the 10 years of Bush tax cuts and by the way the Medicare prescription program Bush signed.

Walmart execs don't make 25 million year. The founders kids make big money along with a few others, but it's not the governments money to take. Nor is it the governments place to dictate how much money people make.

It's down right un-American

[PaceAdvantage]

Walmart execs don't make 25 million year. The founders kids make big money along with a few others, but it's not the governments money to take. Nor is it the governments place to dictate how much money people make.

It's down right un-AmericanSay it again bruddah Ralph!

[jognlope]

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/walmart-ceo-pay-hour-workers-year/story?id=11067470

[PaceAdvantage]

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/walmart-ceo-pay-hour-workers-year/story?id=11067470If those workers were as valuable to the marketplace as the CEO, they'd be earning the same amount of money...

Where in the world did people start getting the idea that a local yokel who stands near the entrance and exclaims "Hi, welcome to WalMart!" is somehow getting screwed because he or she makes tons less than the CEO of the company?

Where did these insidious and wholly unAmerican ideas originate? Who is buying this shit? This idea that everyone deserves to be paid the same, or at the very least, those making a lot need to be cut down in size, and those making little need to be bumped up "just because."

Damn...this is the land of opportunity...the land where you've always been able to PURSUE happiness...you AREN'T GUARANTEED IT....and you AREN'T OWED IT...you aren't owed a HOUSE...a CAR...or a well paying JOB....you EARN THEM...

Wake up people...this is still the United States of America last time I looked. I'm offended by those continually looking to turn this country into the United States of Who The Hell Knows Where....

[Tom]

This is the problem with a minimum wage laws - too many people lack minimum skills.

How the hell much is some dude who stand at the door and says hello worth?
How many MILLION people could handle that job with no training?

How much would YOU pay him if it were your store?

The way you get ahead is, and always has been, make yourself worth more.
That is the American Dream, not a handout or a cut of someone else's reward for taking a risk.

Let's face fact, many people are not capable of contributing anything meaningful or valuable.

[Greyfox]

Anyone who believes that a CEO should get more in 1 hour than his employee earns in a year is blinded by a greed lamp.
( But then again I have problems with the super salaries paid to the likes of Oprah and various Sports celebrities. So what the hell do I know?)

[PaceAdvantage]

Anyone who believes that a CEO should get more in 1 hour than his employee earns in a year is blinded by a greed lamp.
( But then again I have problems with the super salaries paid to the likes of Oprah and various Sports celebrities. So what the hell do I know?)It's not a question of greed. It's a question of what the marketplace will support. It's called free enterprise.

If WalMart can't find enough greeters or other low-level employees, it will have to raise its pay rate for those individuals in order to attract the appropriate amount of staff.

The same goes for the CEO. Do you think the company wants to spend more or less on employee compensation, no matter the level? If they could get a CEO of equal status and ability that would satisfy shareholders and the Board of Directors for $1M a year instead of $20M, don't you think they would?

Public companies aren't usually in the business of giving money away when they don't have to...

[Tom]

How much was Steve Jobs worth to apple?
Should Obama have been able to set his salary?

[Greyfox]

If they could get a CEO of equal status and ability that would satisfy shareholders and the Board of Directors for $1M a year instead of $20M, don't you think they would?

Public companies aren't usually in the business of giving money away when they don't have to...

Obviously the Board of Directors believe he is worth it.
I don't.
There are probably many bright individuals who could do an equivalent job for less.

[Greyfox]

How much was Steve Jobs worth to apple?


Time will tell. All men are replaceable and the employee who thinks he isn't is a fool.

[Tom]

Obviously the Board of Directors believe he is worth it.
I don't.
There are probably many bright individuals who could do an equivalent job for less.

Unless you own stock, it is none of your business, or mine. They chose this guy. It is their right. No one held a gun to their heads to buy stock.

[Greyfox]

Unless you own stock, it is none of your business, or mine. They chose this guy. It is their right. No one held a gun to their heads to buy stock.

True. I agree.
Besides if Walmart ever failed China's economy would collapse.